ArticleJournal of patient-centered research and reviews2020
Enhancing Immunization Rates in Two Urban Academic Primary Care Clinics: A Before and After Assessment.
Article in Journal of patient-centered research and reviews, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Improving primary health care quality for refugees and asylum seekers: A systematic review of interventional approaches.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Pooled it
- Article
- Implementation of a Multidisciplinary Medication Refill Protocol.PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeImmunization rates in many cities in the United States remain suboptimal compared to Healthy People 2020 Goals and are lower than national averages. This study aimed to determine whether a lecture-based educational intervention targeted at nurses and medical assistants would improve vaccination rates.
methodsWe conducted a quality improvement study in two urban academic family medicine clinics serving a predominantly Medicaid patient population as well as a sizable proportion of refugees. The intervention consisted of 3 lectures that were delivered to clinic nurses and medical assistants. Vaccinations in 1689 patients - 872 in the 3-month preintervention period, 817 in the 3-month postintervention period - were analyzed.
resultsFollowing the educational intervention, a statistically significant increase was seen only in human papillomavirus vaccine immunization rates for 13-18-year-olds (from 90.7% [n=54] to 100% [n=45]; P=0.036). When the results were stratified by clinic, only 1 site showed statistically significant increases in: pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (23-valent) for high-risk 19-to-64-year-olds (from 36.4% [n=154] to 47.8% [n=136]; P=0.049);
conclusionsUltimately, this quality improvement study demonstrated that educational interventions alone have a limited impact on increasing immunization rates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32002447PMC6988711W3152843332What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.